F v M

F v M

The child was not provided with the opportunity to be heard in the Russian proceedings, violating fundamental principles of procedure under English law and Article 23(b). Recognition of the Russian order would also be manifestly contrary to public policy under Article 23(d) due to the child's refugee status and the best interests of the child, which would be severely compromised by separation from her mother. The appeal is dismissed and the Russian order is not recognised.

Parties
Applicant: F; Respondent: M
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Family Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Register Foreign Custody Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; registration of Russian order refused
Legal Topics
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Child's Right to Be Heard, Public Policy Exception, Refugee Status and Child Return, Discretion in Recognition of Foreign Orders
Family Law International Child Law Immigration Law Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Child's Right to Be Heard Public Policy Exception Refugee Status and Child Return Discretion in Recognition of Foreign Orders

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F

Applicant

M

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Register Foreign Custody Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the child was provided the opportunity to be heard in the Russian proceedings as required by English law and Article 23(b) of the Hague 1996 Convention
  2. 2 Whether recognition of the Russian order would be manifestly contrary to public policy under Article 23(d) given the child's refugee status and best interests
  3. 3 Whether the district judge erred in refusing registration at first instance

Ratio Decidendi

The child was not provided with the opportunity to be heard in the Russian proceedings, violating fundamental principles of procedure under English law and Article 23(b). Recognition of the Russian order would also be manifestly contrary to public policy under Article 23(d) due to the child's refugee status and the best interests of the child, which would be severely compromised by separation from her mother. The appeal is dismissed and the Russian order is not recognised.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; registration of Russian order refused

Orders

  • The appeal against the order of District Judge Gibson is dismissed.
  • The grounds of objection under Article 23(2)(b) and (d) are made out.